Author Archive for Academics Review

The USRTK FOIA Campaign Against Academics: 40-plus years of public science, research and teaching under assault

(English) As a public-sector research scientist, it was expected and a requirement of my position at the University of Illinois that I collaborate with and solicit the engagement of those working in my field of expertise. University and private sector collaborations are critically essential to ensure the public benefits from the best and most complete understanding of research and emerging commercial developments of any technology.

Steven Druker: Twisted Truth in Altered Genes Book

(English) Druker exploits misinformation found in a limited selection of cherry-picked studies as the foundation for his unsubstantiated claims intended to scare people away from GMOs and Big Ag. The problem is there is nothing new in his claims.

Scientist deconstructs Séralini’s PLOS GMO study: ‘Failed attempt at redemption’

(English) As a neuroscientist who works regularly with lab animals, I find these claims baffling. Alison Bernstein, Ph.D. Originally published by the Genetic Literacy Project. Dr. Bernstein is a scientist studying Parkinson’s disease living in Atlanta with her husband, 2 kids and 2 cats. Follow her on her Mommy PhD Facebook page and on Twitter @mommyphd2.

IARC glyphosate cancer review fails on multiple fronts

The International Agency for Research on Cancer Monograph evaluation of certain insecticides and herbicides earns an F grade for failure to consider all the available studies, placing weight on weak and discredited studies (several in the advocacy community are already using this report claiming it is a vindication of the discredited Seralini GMO cancer claims), […]

CNN “UpWave” article: 10 ways to keep your diet GMO-free

This article comes from the website unwave, a new Turner Corporation venture that proudly claims to provide “a distinctive opportunity for Turner to leverage our vast branding and content expertise to create business opportunities with advertisers and consumers in a high-growth, high-impact business segment.” In short, it’s slick deceptive internet advertising for the lucrative health […]

1 vote, average: 1,00 out of 121 vote, average: 1,00 out of 121 vote, average: 1,00 out of 121 vote, average: 1,00 out of 121 vote, average: 1,00 out of 121 vote, average: 1,00 out of 121 vote, average: 1,00 out of 121 vote, average: 1,00 out of 121 vote, average: 1,00 out of 121 vote, average: 1,00 out of 121 vote, average: 1,00 out of 121 vote, average: 1,00 out of 12 (1 votes, average: 1,00 out of 12)
You need to be a registered member to rate this post.
Loading...

Debunking pseudo science “lab testing” health risk claims about glyphosate (Roundup)

(English) “Recently claims of adverse effects caused by glyphosate have begun to appear. Although none of the reports has proven credible, it appears that these reports are part of a deliberate campaign to create the False impression that glyphosate is highly toxic and harmful as a basis of calling for bans…”

Reuters’ Gillam earns failing grade, again, for coverage of GMO science issues

(English) Reuters’ Carey Gillam repeated citing of false claims ignores the robust global consensus on the safety of crops improved through biotechnology, earning her another failing grade for accuracy and science journalism.

(English) Why Consumers Pay More for Organic Foods? Fear Sells and Marketers Know it.

(English) An academic review of more than 25 years of market research, marketing tactics and government programs driving sales in the organic and natural product industries

CNN Health article ignores overwhelming scientific consensus on GMO safety: D-

 Julie Taylor earns a D- for her CNN Health article published via upwave – “Turner Broadcasting’s new lifestyle brand designed to entertain the health into you!”  Taylor writes, “There is no consensus in the scientific community that GMOs are safe, says David Schubert at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies…”  To read Taylor’s article which opens, […]

Turning Science into a Circus: The New Yorker, Rachel Aviv and Tyrone Hayes

(English) Syngenta may have good reason to feel it was treated unfairly, even dishonestly, in the New Yorker article. The real damage, however, is that such shoddy journalism debases the public’s understanding of how science should be conducted and the importance of non-politicized, sound science-based regulatory systems to protect consumers